<HTML>I have been teaching a course in the thought of Maharal to
post-high-school American women in Israel on a one year program. It has
been enlightening to me, who had not had much exposure to Maharal before
preparing the course. However, the students and I have run into the same
problems consistently. We read and analyze Maharal's discussions of
various topics, unpack the dense text, and try to figure out the
relationships between the various ideas, concepts, and terms that he
inevitably attempts to connect. Yet, at the end of the class, we are
still not sure what he means because we can not define the terms that he
uses in any kind of a precise way.
This has raised a number of problems. First, we do not understand
what we have learned. Second, and this is more important, it has left the
students with a sense of diminished respect for Maharal.
I have discussed this problem with a number of people, and many
have suggested that this is inherent in Maharal's style. We can not
define the terms because Maharal does not define them. If this is true it
is a tremendous weakness in Maharal's religious thought. Alternatively,
he does define his terms, scattered here and there among his vast
writings. My students and I can not define the terms because we do not
know where to look.
Have any of you run into a similar dilemma in teaching or studying
Maharal in the past? What have you done to solve the problem? What can I
do, both to increase my understanding of Maharal and to help encourage the
students in their frustration?
Thanks,
Yoel Finkelman</HTML>
